The picture apparently was taken by an 11-year-old boy at the time, but it has yet to surface anywhere on the Internet. If it really does exist, then that proves not only that Clemens is the King of the Whoppers but that Canseco’s credibility is back to being lacking.

All you Clemens defenders, what do you think of this latest information?

Andy Pettitte faced the music about an hour ago at the New York Yankees’ camp, and before start any more of those annoying “St. Andy” testimonials, let’s start with this:

He’s been caught in another lie.

The latest was revealed when Pettitte told the assembled gathering at the Yanks’ camp in Florida that his friendship with Roger Clemens has been strained, but that “Roger knows how I feel about him. He knows I’ve admired him and continue to admire him. He’s a great friend to me.”

Now, that may well be true — though why would he continue to admire Clemens? — but it goes in direct contrast to what a “friend” of Pettitte told Newsday on Jan. 19. The friend said that Clemens and Pettitte “were never as close as they were made out to be.”

Didn’t see Pettitte rush to clarify his views once that article was written. So, in essence, he was an accomplice to that lie. Or, he’s lying now about his feelings toward Clemens. Either way, it adds to Pettitte’s “mis-truth” total, and by now, I’ve lost track of the number. Needless to say this “role model” or “consistent honesty,” (Representative Henry Waxman’s words) could have a dueling-nose fight with Pinocchio by now.

OK, that said, Pettitte deserves a little credit (very little) for sitting down with the media, becuase the gutless, baseball-player thing to do would’ve been to avoid it altogether. And he does seem genuinely sorry for his role in baseball’s steroid mess. Hopefully, Clemens was watching. He could learn from Pettitte’s humility.

Back in the office after the final two weeks of offseason vacation, and feeling a bit like it’s the first day of school. Time to catch up on some things I missed, as well as looking ahead:

— The Roger Clemens/Brian McNamee “debate” on Capitol Hill basically revealed nothing. We learned that 1) Clemens is a scumbag. 2) McNamee is a scumbag, and 3) Congress has many buffoons representing it. Honestly, didn’t we already know all those things?

— So, the Giants are giving Barry Zito another Opening Day start. Giants fans, if you didn’t figure this out last season, let’s repeat: The best chance Zito has to succeed is to get outside his head. Handing him the ball for the opener, in my humble opinion, is not an effective way to start that process.

— Meantime, A’s starter Joe Blanton is a hot commodity, but unless the Reds are ready to part with Jay Bruce or Homer Bailey, among others, and the Dodgers are set to give up a bounty, bet on Billy Beane holding onto Blanton at least until the July 31 trade deadline.

— Eager to see how Jack Cust’s season unfolds for the A’s. True, he seems to have a job nailed down entering the spring, and that’s a first for him. But you wonder how much rope he’ll get. Cust, a career minor-league journeyman before 2007, hit only 11 home runs after the All-Star break, and finished at .217 with 7 HR and 26 RBI vs. lefties. With Mike Sweeney in camp, and the Daric Barton era about to start, Cust may wind up expendable.

If you get a few minutes, amuse yourself by checking out the 1,800-word, 44-page report released by Roger Clemens’ agent, Randy Hendricks and two associates. First thought that hit me when I saw it: Who was the poor intern that got stuck with binding that thing together? Second thing: Where were these charts when I was failing geometry?

Seriously, though, this report doesn’t change a thing. I’d argue that it only makes Clemens look more guilty. As my geometry teacher once said — and I did ultimately pass that class — mathematics can prove almost anything, but common sense is called common sense for a reason.

Translation in this case: Most innocent men don’t go to such calculating tactics to prove their innocence, because they’re comfortable with the knowledge that they aren’t guilty. And let’s remember something very important here: Clemens is not on trial. So if truly doesn’t care what people think — and that has been the company line, hasn’t it? — then why is he investing so much energy to prove his point? As he told Mike Wallace on “60 Minutes,” it’s near impossible to prove a negative.

Clemens’ attempt to do so is not doing him much good. In this lates entry into the affair, the charts are supposed to tell us that Clemens did not have any strange spikes in his career performance and that his career was not as astounding as the numbers might indicate. But like everything in this case, that doesn’t tell the whole story.

Here’s what I’d like to see. I’d like to see video clips of Clemens pitching early in the 1998 season with Toronto side-by-side with clips of Clemens pitching later in the 1998 season. I want to see what kind of life were on the Rocket’s pitches when he went 5-6 with a 3.50 ERA through the first two months, and what kind of life his pitches had when he went 15-0 with an ERA under two the rest of the way. By life, I mean natural movement — the kind you get from really being able to drive through the ball, and the kind that Clemens was lacking so much two years prior that he was forced to sign with the Toronto Blue Jays of all teams.

Brian McNamee supposedly injected Clemens right about the time Clemens’ 1998 season took off, so that’s why such video footage would be so helpful. Of course, we don’t see that in this report, because that could be damaging evidence for the Clemens camp. Imagine seeing the ball pushed from Clemens’ hand early in 1998, and then imagine it exploding from his hand after the dates McNamee allegedly injected him. I’m guessing Team Roger wouldn’t have a set answer for that one.

The point is, and I’ve said this before, is that Clemens should shut his mouth, and his “team” should fade to the back. As Clemens himself seemed to say on “60 Minutes,” it’s rather impossible to prove a negative. The more his camp tries to prove it, the more they make him look guilty (which, by the way, I think he is. I often wonder if Clemens did shoot up with PED’s and has now lied about it so often that he believes his lies. But that pathological issue is a subject for a psychiatrist, not me).

In the meantime, the game will go on without him. And as he fades from the spotlight, the questions will go to his children, which if you think about it is probably the saddest part of this story. Clemens, on the other hand, told us he couldn’t wait to be out of the public sector, so he could be left alone. Thus, it sure seems sinister that he’s spending so much energy making sure his name stays in the spotlight.

— Slightly less than a month until the Giants report for spring training, and Aaron Rowand remains their only major move. How disappointing is that? Obviously, the Giants will be laying a lot on the line with their dynamite starting staff, but Rowand (while a great clubhouse addition) is not a panacea for the offense. The Giants may be trying to position themselves to win a lot of 2-1 and 3-2 games, but if no more moves are made, they’ll find themselves losing more games by those scores than they win.

— The A’s signings of Huston Street and Joe Blanton to one-year deals last week mean nothing in terms of their long-term future in Oakland. But the hunch here is that both will start the season and that both could stick around for a rebuilding effort if the A’s perform better than expected in 2008. We’ll know where they are by the trading deadline, when Blanton, in particular, could really net a lot.

— Had an hour-long conversation with an A’s executive last week, and what I can reveal is that one very interesting question was raised. Of all the A’s who have departed as free agents or been traded since Jason Giambi walked away in 2001, which one or two would you still like to have in 2008? My somewhat-lame answer was Miguel Tejada, but you know what, right now, today, I wouldn’t want him. He’s going to make $18 million this season, he’s lost a ton of range at shortstop, and his best days as a hitter are behind him. Still, I would’ve loved to have seen what the A’s could’ve done in 2004, ’05 and ’06 had they signed Tejada to an extension.

— On that subject, the A’s are promoting their annual FanFest hard, with the key attraction being a tour of the team’s clubhouse. Can just hear it now: “This is where Nick Swisher used to locker. This is where Dan Haren used to locker. This is where Miguel Tejada injected steroids ….”

Lots to discuss from today’s Congressional hearings starring Bud Selig, Donald Fehr and George Mitchell. Now that the home Internet service is back up, let’s get to them.

— So, the Giants should’ve responded to former trainer Stan Conte’s concerns that Greg Anderson was bringing steroids into the clubhouse? Gee, never would’ve guessed. Look, the actual news that Congress was mighty unpleased with how general manager Brian Sabean and owner Peter Magowan reacted shouldn’t really be news at all. The newsy thing is that grown men, with supposedly solid upbringings, could just thumb their nose at ethics. Then again, that really isn’t news, because a) professional sports has been about gaining an edge, and b) the more money your corporation attains, the easier it is to assume that accountability will never come back to you. There’s been many a Congressman (and Presidents) who operated under the same assumption.

— Or, to put it another way: What were the Giants going to do? Bonds was their meal ticket. Say your workplace had an employee so good at what he/she did that no matter his/her personal conduct, the company was rolling in green? Hard to believe the company CEO and the other employees wouldn’t look the other way.

— Miguel Tejda, step right up, you’re the next competitor in the “Amazing Disgraced.” Congress is going to investigate Tejada for perjury, which means it’s probably only a matter of time until he’s forced to confess or stage questionable interviews on “60 Minutes.”

— Speaking of Tejada, it’s now official. A’s fans should’ve stopped watching after the great 1970′s run. Jose Canseco and Mark McGwire, charter members of the “Amazing Disgraced,” have permanently stained the great teams of the late 1980s (thank goodness those teams were defined much, much more by the classy Dave Stewart than by the Bash Brothers), and now some of the greatest moments of the 20-game winning streak are questionable, too.

— Here’s the amazing thing about Bud Selig and Donald Fehr. The more they spill the rhetoric about wishing they’d known something sooner, and agonizing that they didn’t do more and pledging to be more vigilant in the future, the more you get the feeling that if presented with the exact same set of circumstances again, both would respond the exact same way.

Anyway, the point is, baseball is a feeling a bit tired. I’ll get back to blogging about the grand ol’ game as the week goes on, but right now, what’s standing out the most to me from the weekend was the press conference held by Terrell Owens after the Cowboys bit the bullet against the New York Giants on Sunday.

If you saw the clips of T.O. or read some of the accounts, then you’re aware that the former 49ers wide receiver let loose a flood of tears in front of reporters.

The question: Was it an act?

I didn’t see it as such. Now I know I’m not nearly as up-to-speed on the personalities in that league as I am in baseball, but it seems to me that Owens did a lot of growing up this season. He rarely griped about himself. There were no off-the-field theatrics. And he didn’t throw any teammates under the bus.

In short, he seemed to grow up. At no point, did the Cowboys’ season revolve around what T.O. was doing, and at no point, did T.O. take steps to make sure it would. Should give faith to the cynical — and I’m in that camp more than most — that athletes can change their stripes. Took T.O. longer than most to realize that the less he draws attention to himself, the better it works out for everybody, including himself. But at least he seemed finally to figure it out.

Listen to the various talk shows this morning driving to the office, and I was surprised to hear how many people thought it was a premeditated stunt on Owens’ part, and that all he was showing were crocodile tears? Wonder how many of those were 49ers fans?

Anyway, figured it’d be an interesting place to start the discussion this morning while we waited for the Kotsay deal to come down. Tell me what you think.

Had some time to digest that bizarre press conference involving Roger Clemens on Monday, and a couple of other thoughts came to mind that I didn’t mention in yesterday’s blogs.

1) Clemens’ willingness to put Brian McNamee’s personal life on public display — in particular, the state of health for McNamee’s 10-year-old son — was disgusting. A lot of that phone conversation was pertinent in Clemens’ apparent goal of destroying McNamee’s credibility, but there was really no reason to involve McNamee’s son in the conversation. I understand McNamee contacted Clemens and used his son’s sickness as a reaching-out point. But that part of the conversation has nothing to do with the mess to which Clemens and McNamee are linked, and should’ve been bleeped out when played in front of reporters. Bottom line, Clemens was trying to portray himself as a sympathetic friend by using a former friend’s sick child as a media op. Gross.

2) McNamee had some seriously brass gonads in reaching out to Clemens. Let’s imagine what McNamee was thinking. OK, I gave you up to the feds. I permanently stained your career. I probably should’ve kept quiet and gone to jail. But, oh, my son is sick, can you help me? Now granted, watching your own child fall ill will drive a man to do anything to change things. But, to paraphrase Tom Cruise in “The Color of Money,” he’s got brass, man. He’s got brass.”

Other news from the Clemens fallout:

1) Andy Pettitte is undecided whether he’ll testify in front of Congress. Big stunner there. Pettitte has absolutely nothing to gain by going to Congress. He’d be asked about Clemens, his friend and McNamee, also his former trainer. Thus, he would a) have to beg out of answering questions about the two of them or b) paint one of them as a liar. Nice choices.

Of course, Pettitte could help the game by telling Congress all he knew about the use of performance-enhancing drugs. But as much as they say otherwise, few of these players truly care about the health of the game. Otherwise, more objections about the rise of PED’s would’ve been made by members of the players’ union.

— Baseball has decided to ramp up security in its clubhouses. Among the changes: Teams no longer will be notified the night before drug testers arrive. Gee, what a novel concept.

Well, Roger Clemens has now aired his story to a room full of reporters, and his lawyer aired a conversation between the Rocket and his former personal trainer Brian McNamee. And if you’re more confused than ever about what to believe, join the crowd.

About the only thing definitive you can say is that Clemens’ legal side should inform him to stay quiet after his appearance in front of Congress, because the more Clemens talks, the more he creates doubt about the his version of the truth.

Take this phone conversation he had with McNamee. McNamee, on at nearly two dozen occasions, asked Clemens, “What do you want me to do?” At no point, does Clemens respond by telling him to recant his story. Granted I’m not a guy with a lawyer telling me what to do, but I’d guess my instinct, were I in Clemens’ position, would be to tell McNamee to do just that.

Clemens also hurt himself when he stammered and gave a weak explanation when asked why he didn’t have a doctor inject him with the Vitamin B-12 and lidocaine — the substances Clemens acknowledges to have used. He said initally, ”I didn’t know” McNamee wasn’t licensed to give some shots. That’s akin to, “Gee officer, I didn’t know the speed limit here was only 35 mph.”

One other point. When McNamee asked Clemens if he (McNamee) should show up at the press conference, Clemens seemed to ignore him.

But here’s why confusion reigns. When Clemens mentioned the report to McNamee and that “for the life of me, I’m trying to figure out why you told those guys I did steroids,” McNamee responded by saying, “I understand that.”

Not exactly the same as saying, “Because you did!”

In other words, who knows what to believe at this point. At the least, these are two very sketchy individuals. Clemens has never been forthcoming about injections he’s received; if there was nothing to hide, he surely could’ve volunteered that information any number of times he talked about his training regimen. McNamee clearly had a direct hand in baseball’s steroid epidemic, which calls into question his character and credibility, and by whistling his clients — even if compelled to do so by federal authorities — he branded himself a rat. At one point in the conversation, McNamee told Clemens he’d “go to jail for you,” which is an odd thing to say considering the reason he’s supposed to be believed is because he was trying to avoid jail.

Next up in this saga, Clemens’ appearance in front of Congress on Jan. 16. Clemens can be as angry as he wants, but it’s worth wondering if he’ll be as defiant. It’s one thing to conduct a press conference; it’s another to testify under oath.

Two questions I’d like to hear: Roger, do you think it’s possible that McNamee injected you with steroids and HGH, and told you it was Vitamin B-12 and lidocaine? If so, why weren’t you more careful about what you put in your body?

If nothing else, one incontrovertible fact has emerged from the Mitchell Report and Clemens’ part in it. Simply put, if athletes really are serious that they want a PED-free sport, they need to be much more vigilant about what’s being given to them. If they’re not, then they should be seen as accomplices to an era that’s not going away anytime soon.

Hey, I realize I’m more cyncial than most. But really, wouldn’t you be a fool to believe anything that comes out of this guy’s mouth? If he was so innocent, why didn’t he issue some kind of statement, without any lawyering, on the day the Mitchell Report was released? An interesting article on ESPN.com over the weekend by the network’s interview coach stated the obvious when it said, “the instinct of the innocent is to talk and the instinct of the guilty is to run to a lawyer.” Exactly.

Here’s another problem I have with Clemens: In the video he released proclaiming his innocence, he insisted that McNamee had not injected him with steroids or HGH, but he conveniently left out that McNamee had injected him with lidocaine and Vitamin B-12, a fact that came out only during his intervew with Wallace. Clemens has done several interviews regarding his conditioning over the years, and never once mentioned that he was being injected with anything. If there was nothing shady about that, then why not volunteer it?

Clemens’ admission about the lidocaine and Vitamin B12 also seemed a little too rehearsed for me. Watch the interview and see how he spits out the answer, the smugness in his voice. A little too smug for me.

It was also comical to hear how he doesn’t understand why 24 or 25 years in the public spotlight doesn’t buy him “an inch of respect,” or any “benefit of the doubt.” Sometimes, the absolute inability of some star athletes to grip reality is unbelievable. If Clemens wants to complain about that, then he should take it up with Donald Fehr and his fellow union members, who a) long have resisted drug testing and b) have been caught in more lies than the boy who cried wolf.

The bottom line regarding this whole thing, as colleague Gary Peterson wrote today, is that the Clemens spin job is in speed cycle right now. Let’s see how he answers some really difficult questions that could come in a press conference today (Uh, Roger, why didn’t you lobby the union and your fellow baseball teammates to pine for the elimination of performance-enhancing drugs?) and how he performs in front of Congress, if he chooses to show up.

Speaking of Congress, let’s keep one thing in mind. It’s entirely possible that the Clemens lawsuit was filed not with complete vindication in mind but rather to give Clemens an excuse to either skip the Congressional hearings (he was invited, not subpoenaed) or be choosy with the questions he answers. It’s difficult to win a defamation suit, especially when one is a public figure, so Clemens deserves credit for going full bore with a lawsuit, because it will expose him to sworn testimony in a court of law. Well, it’s hard for me to imagine, anyway, but again, maybe I’m more cynical than most.

In the final analysis, my feelings about Clemens haven’t really changed. Yes, I think he’s a Hall of Famer, because he was one of the best pitchers of his era, and if he used, he certainly wasn’t alone. But he’s absolutely NOT a guy I’d ever have pitch a huge game for me. All you need to know about that are the games he pitched and lost against Dave Stewart in the late 1980s and early 90s.